Thank god cupcakes are gone

gmp72

LFChikarason wrote:

I rarely get cupcakes, and never go hunting for them, if I get them, it's a pretty big deal. So I was very surprised to see this one on my way to 1200 in Fist Bump

You could have left my ign, un-redacted.
I would not have minded.

gmp72
DJU

LFChikarason

gmp72 wrote:

LFChikarason wrote:

I rarely get cupcakes, and never go hunting for them, if I get them, it's a pretty big deal. So I was very surprised to see this one on my way to 1200 in Fist Bump

You could have left my ign, un-redacted.
I would not have minded.

gmp72
DJU

Just playing it safe, I remember posts/threads getting deleted here with others gamer tags still in there.

fmftint

Alsmir wrote:

Lets stop pretending that bakers were "heroes of common folk" who did it out of the kindness of their hear. Come on, no matter how you try to describe it, cupcake meta was simply disgusting. Cupcakes are gone, so it's time to brainstorm some ideas how to improve current PvP.

Except they aren't gone, they only got more exclusive. Expect scores at the top to climb, only now the points won't trickle down

Chipster22

Just to add a piece of anecdotal evidence.

I finished 8th in Fist Bump with a score of 1,213.

Previously my finishes were netting me top 50 or top 100 spots. My event scores were usually from around 1,000 to the low 1,300's. I may have hit 1,500 once.

8th is obviously much better than before the changes, but perhaps I just was fortunate to get an easy bracket this time.

For reference, I have 19 champed 4 stars, which included 4Thor, Antman, and X-23 boosted during the event. My top 5 stars are OML at 390, Phoenix at 316, and Silver Surfer at 293.

Edit: I think sometimes I made the top 25 previously as well.

acescracked

Alsmir wrote:

..
Lets stop pretending that bakers were "heroes of common folk" who did it out of the kindness of their hear. ....

Umm yea, bakers did do it out of the kidness of their hearts. Is there some benefit to the baker to make a cupcake? Did it help them directly in anyway? At best it helped their alliance mates and that's it.

The extra time exposed to hits, the chance multiple randoms hit their cupcake before they could reset their A team isn't really worth a few of your alliance mates getting some easy points.

I scored anywhere from 1350 to 1700 in each PvP event. I'm a solo climber from my alliance mates. I tried to bake at least once an event. I had zero benefit from doing it other than seeing all the hits come in after I shielded. I didn't even announce my cupcake in a line room due to having an issue with MPQ reloading. Mostly random players would get my cupcake. That's what nearly every baker gets out of making a cupcake.

Tell me then why I baked if not from the kindness of my heart? Please step off that soap box and stop preaching about things you know nothing about.

M C K

I don't mind the cupcakes being gone. I really don't. And it has very little to do with gameplay, honestly. Yes, it does feel like a "spirit of the game" issue was at least recognized and addressed with their removal (whether correctly is up for debate), but I never used them and never cared that others used them. So I truthfully never had a dog in this race.

The real benefit for me in regards to cupcakes? Quite simply, it's escapism.

I live in a world where I am responsible for supporting and raising a family, maintaining gainful employment, voting for the least of many lunatics to be the President of my nation, and ensuring I stay alive long enough to accomplish each of these. The Great Cupcake Debates of 2016, a deeply polarizing issue fought over a relatively minor component of a single mode of a match-three game, have provided me endless entertainment for little to no investment. For this, I offer my gratitude.

When they introduce another small change (alternate costumes for characters, for example), let's all hope that the forums explode with a similar level of righteous indignation.

simonsez

Alsmir wrote:

Lets stop pretending that bakers were "heroes of common folk" who did it out of the kindness of their hear.

Believe what you want. I'll just sit here and spend the morning reading posts from common folk who don't understand why they found it so much harder to hit 1200 in this event...

We_are_Venom

I was not going to post again because i changed my user name to eliminate being confused with another user but out of respect to those who have allowed me behind the scenes to engage in the process i feel it's necessary to reevaluate my thoughts i originally posted.

I see why cc were/are used and the benefit they provide/d. The level of coordination involved is amazing. As an outsider, indiscriminately choosing high value targets and climbing can be plentiful because there is no further consideration other than winning. With the coordination, you are navigating a minefield and cc are safe passage through for all.

I do see both sides match clearer now. For an outsider at the 4* level unaware of the system, it's possible you knock over the applecart to your own detriment. To this point tho i have not seen unwarranted retaliation against anyone that is not a known sniper.

In closing, the cc system is highly regulated and i now salute the efforts of the people that take the time to coordinate to the benefit of others.

This user name is now retired. Thank you.

Polares

simonsez wrote:

Alsmir wrote:

Lets stop pretending that bakers were "heroes of common folk" who did it out of the kindness of their hear.

Believe what you want. I'll just sit here and spend the morning reading posts from common folk who don't understand why they found it so much harder to hit 1200 in this event...

But have you considered that maybe this is the way it should be? I don't think 3 rosters were ever supposed to get to 1200(1300) and get the 25 CPs. The final progression should be achievable just by rosters that already have some 4s champed and 5s. For 3->4 rosters the 900(1000) is where they should probably get to and get the 4 cover and also get 10 CPs ( the 10+15CPs is something that should have been there in the first place, but it is a good fix ).

I think this is a better progression, but this is just my opinion. Now 3s roster will need to build a 4 roster before they start building their 5s (there are a lot of people out there with much stronger 5s than 4s, and this should have never happened in the first place).

As I said somewhere else, the only problem is that now there is a lot of people that was used to get to 1300 that should have never gotten to and now they can't anymore. And they are pissed. And it is going to be quite hard to convince any of them that they should have never gotten to 1300 in the first place and that the game is 'better' now. Devs should have fixed the cupcakes the second they appeared, now it is a mess.

cyineedsn

Polares wrote:

But have you considered that maybe this is the way it should be? I don't think 3 rosters were ever supposed to get to 1200(1300) and get the 25 CPs. The final progression should be achievable just by rosters that already have some 4s champed and 5s. For 3->4 rosters the 900(1000) is where they should probably get to and get the 4 cover and also get 10 CPs ( the 10+15CPs is something that should have been there in the first place, but it is a good fix ).

I think this is a better progression, but this is just my opinion. Now 3s roster will need to build a 4 roster before they start building their 5s (there are a lot of people out there with much stronger 5s than 4s, and this should have never happened in the first place).

As I said somewhere else, the only problem is that now there is a lot of people that was used to get to 1300 that should have never gotten to and now they can't anymore. And they are pissed. And it is going to be quite hard to convince any of them that they should have never gotten to 1300 in the first place and that the game is 'better' now. Devs should have fixed the cupcakes the second they appeared, now it is a mess.

Is this the way it should be? 11 people in my bracket finished with top progression in PVP (perhaps more got there and then fell back down in score). In my PVE bracket, I'm 10k over top progression and at 118th place. PVP's run shorter and more often than PVE, but not 10x more often. Doesn't this raise questions on whether PVP rewards and PVP rewards should be roughly equal?

Polares

cyineedsn wrote:

Polares wrote:

But have you considered that maybe this is the way it should be? I don't think 3 rosters were ever supposed to get to 1200(1300) and get the 25 CPs. The final progression should be achievable just by rosters that already have some 4s champed and 5s. For 3->4 rosters the 900(1000) is where they should probably get to and get the 4 cover and also get 10 CPs ( the 10+15CPs is something that should have been there in the first place, but it is a good fix ).

I think this is a better progression, but this is just my opinion. Now 3s roster will need to build a 4 roster before they start building their 5s (there are a lot of people out there with much stronger 5s than 4s, and this should have never happened in the first place).

As I said somewhere else, the only problem is that now there is a lot of people that was used to get to 1300 that should have never gotten to and now they can't anymore. And they are pissed. And it is going to be quite hard to convince any of them that they should have never gotten to 1300 in the first place and that the game is 'better' now. Devs should have fixed the cupcakes the second they appeared, now it is a mess.

Is this the way it should be? 11 people in my bracket finished with top progression in PVP (perhaps more got there and then fell back down in score). In my PVE bracket, I'm 10k over top progression and at 118th place. PVP's run shorter and more often than PVE, but not 10x more often. Doesn't this raise questions on whether PVP rewards and PVP rewards should be roughly equal?

Well PvP has always awarded many more CPs than PvE (almost double if you got to 1300 in all PvPs of a season), and now that CPs are going to be split, you will be able to win almost the same amount of CPs in PvP as in PvE without getting to the top progression, 30CPs every week just by getting to 575 in each of the three PvPs run every week.

Now it is going to be something like (for every week)

30CPs PvP(575) < 40CPs avg (PvE full progression) << 75 CPs (PvP1200)

not counting any placement just progression.

So it is not as black and white as some people paint it.

And also things will change when SCL8+ is oppened don't forget that. 3 rosters will place much much better when big rosters move to SCL8+

simonsez

Polares wrote:

But have you considered that maybe this is the way it should be?

I'm not arguing in that. Believe me, I'm not complaining that after hitting the top prog as usual, I got 3 Luke covers instead of one Ares cover. My point was that there are still way too many people who don't understand that ccs helped them, and still think the bakers were greedy villains.

Pylgrim

Now that the OP has very graciously revised their original opinion and bowed away from the conversation, I too, will refrain from posting anything more related to it. I am now repeating myself and allowing myself to get heated over the spiteful attitude of some people on the opposing side of the argument, becoming spiteful myself as well.

I do understand that CCs are gone for good and I even understand /why/ they are gone. However, work still needs to be done to patch the holes left by their disappearance and that are worked into the very fabric of the system, which created a necessity for their existence to begin with. That is something that the devs need to hear, and I trust that all this discussion helped at least to drive home the importance of the concerns of a not insignificant part of the playerbase. The change to the rewards show that the devs did understand some of the impact that the removal of CCs would have so I'm actually optimistic that after some more testing a balance will be struck.

I apologise to anybody to whom I was snarkier than I should have, and I thank one last time to all the bakers who whether out of the goodness of their heart or seeking their own alliances' goals helped me and many others progress after terrible luck had badly set me back and stagnated my advance. Peace.

JVReal

aesthetocyst wrote:

* I do so love the invocation of the "almighty" in the thread title. An unintentional admission of fundamentalism on the OP's part

God Save the Quest?

jobob

Alsmir wrote:

Lets stop pretending that bakers were "heroes of common folk" who did it out of the kindness of their hear.

Do you have any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, that says it wasn't done out of kindness?

I've been a part of probably the most prolific group of bakers in the game for several seasons now. I can tell you that, like any group, motivations are different for different people, but there were DEFINITELY some doing it for altruistic reasons.

When I joined up, my scores and placement dropped pretty dramatically. From 2500 - 3k to 1500 - 2k. But I didn't care... Anything over 1.3 was just an e-peen measuring contest in my mind. So I would hang low, and give the bakers cover by hitting those that were specifically targeting them. Why would I sacrifice placement and 1000+ points? I'm in an alliance family, we have alliances that range from Top 5 down to groups of new players... I wanted to help bring the players in our lower alliances along as quickly as possible.

Some may hate the level of complexity that CC's brought to the game... bakers, snipers, enforcers, etc... but for a lot of people, the added layers made it more interesting than simply a "king of the mountain" mechanic.

Regardless of how you feel about the CC meta, you should avoid speaking to the motivations of an entire group of people that you have no familiarity with.

simoncklee

Tl;dr - removing cupcakes was right for the game; to improve sense of progression, cp should be introduced at lower points subject to your SCL.

While I get that everyone wants some sense of progression when playing, I do think removing cupcakes was the "right" thing to do for what is meant to be a competitive event.

Picture an alternate scenario: let's pretend that PVP now puts your weakest team on defence; you lose no points for being attacked; 25cp is awarded at 1k points; and everyone gets awarded a cover just for playing.

Where's the fun in the above? The drama? The frustration of losing points and the exhilaration of hitting max prog?

It's extreme of course, but basically cupcakes made the game more dull than not.

On the flip side, I've been playing MPQ from pretty much the beginning (before seasons started), so I admit I have no idea how easy/hard the early meta is these days. Back to my first point on giving players a sense of progression: how about spreading cp throughout the progression ladder as your clearance level increases?

E.g. from SCL 5, start giving players a trickle of cp earlier on (1cp at 350 points, 2cp at 1000 points), and as your SCL increases, spread more cp throughout (2cp at 350, 3cp at 750, 5cp at 1100). Perhaps cap cp at different levels, so only 25cp max can be earned for SCL levels 5-8.

I clearly haven't though through the numbers, but the concept would be similar to progression back when HP could buy covers, and would enable everyone some way to progress their roster as their SCL increases.

FaustianDeal

Alsmir wrote:

Lets stop pretending that bakers were "heroes of common folk" who did it out of the kindness of their hear[sic].

The cupcake meta evolved for the same reason retreat boosting did. Lots of people who play this game don't see the game modes the devs have defined: PvE, PvP? Some would argue that these are all just variations on the only game mode that actually exist: 'PvD' = Players versus Developers. The desired outcome for a lot of those players is to help the less developed rosters on their team reach top progression. For a lot of players (particularly F2P ones) the CP at top progression in PVP are one of the only avenues for roster progression.

I can understand how, being on the outside looking in, seeing 3-4* transition players scoring 4,000+ must be discouraging (or look like cheating) to some. And I can understand the desire to bring stratospheric scoring closer to earth for the overall benefit of the broader community. But this change seems like too heavy-handed a correction implemented far too quickly. Was the intended goal really to see a substantially reduced percentage of players reach the goal of top progression? *ESPECIALLY* when "structuring rewards to allow a decent percentage of players to reach top progression" is cited as the reason not to add more progression rewards for PvE, and why top progression keeps moving down?! That's a funky juxtaposition of inconsistent arguments.

Its one thing to be glad that the era of 5,000+ scores has been put on temporary hold (I don't it is truly and permanently dead), but its another thing to be excited that lots of people were unable to make top progression this event.

jobob

OJSP wrote:

Alsmir wrote:

Yes, PvP system was flawed, but do you really have to fight it by cheating?

I am a baker. I am helping out others by doing so. I get hit a lot and you don't see me complaining anymore.

I am deeply offended that you call us cheaters multiple times.

You have only played the game for so long. We have played the game longer.

We haven't been sandboxed (which is the company's policy against cheaters). Why do you keep calling us cheaters?

FYI. Cupcakes are not gone and will continue to happen. Join the in the fun or find another game.

Your posts are just negative and this is the last time I'm responding to it. Welcome to my ignore list.

For what it's worth... Anyone who classifies baking as "cheating," must also put Winfinite in the same category. It requires you to softcap your roster in a very particular way, and play in a way that the developers do not intend, and have routinely patched out of the game in its previous incarnations. Much like baking/cupcakes, it is, however, possible within the "rules of the game," even if not necessarily the spirit of the game. So anyone who **** about CCs, but has ever relied on Winfinite... please take your hypocrisy elsewhere. At least the bakers were helping the whole player base out. Winfinite helps no one but yourself.

Blahahah

jobob wrote:

OJSP wrote:

Alsmir wrote:

Yes, PvP system was flawed, but do you really have to fight it by cheating?

I am a baker. I am helping out others by doing so. I get hit a lot and you don't see me complaining anymore.

I am deeply offended that you call us cheaters multiple times.

You have only played the game for so long. We have played the game longer.

We haven't been sandboxed (which is the company's policy against cheaters). Why do you keep calling us cheaters?

FYI. Cupcakes are not gone and will continue to happen. Join the in the fun or find another game.

Your posts are just negative and this is the last time I'm responding to it. Welcome to my ignore list.

For what it's worth... Anyone who classifies baking as "cheating," must also put Winfinite in the same category. It requires you to softcap your roster in a very particular way, and play in a way that the developers do not intend, and have routinely patched out of the game in its previous incarnations. Much like baking/cupcakes, it is, however, possible within the "rules of the game," even if not necessarily the spirit of the game. So anyone who **** about CCs, but has ever relied on Winfinite... please take your hypocrisy elsewhere. At least the bakers were helping the whole player base out. Winfinite helps no one but yourself.

I dunno, Winfinite helps me plenty. That team is pure trash on defense and I have a Jean Grey.

More to the point though, I do agree CCs are far from cheating. They're not even a "misuse of mechanics", they're in the game solely because the engine and mechanics permit it.

Thats what makes me think perhaps the change wasn't meant for cupcakes. Perhaps it was simply a way for them to allow players to use teams they wanted without risking getting ****. Say I was fighting a Winfinite, I could use Jean Grey but if mine isn't fully leveled then it would be trouble for me later. Rather instead, my other stronger characters are put out there. Lets me play PvP with a bit more focus on countering my opponents.

Could also be wishful thinking.

grunth13

Blahahah wrote:

jobob wrote:

OJSP wrote:

Alsmir wrote:

Yes, PvP system was flawed, but do you really have to fight it by cheating?

I am a baker. I am helping out others by doing so. I get hit a lot and you don't see me complaining anymore.

I am deeply offended that you call us cheaters multiple times.

You have only played the game for so long. We have played the game longer.

We haven't been sandboxed (which is the company's policy against cheaters). Why do you keep calling us cheaters?

FYI. Cupcakes are not gone and will continue to happen. Join the in the fun or find another game.

Your posts are just negative and this is the last time I'm responding to it. Welcome to my ignore list.

For what it's worth... Anyone who classifies baking as "cheating," must also put Winfinite in the same category. It requires you to softcap your roster in a very particular way, and play in a way that the developers do not intend, and have routinely patched out of the game in its previous incarnations. Much like baking/cupcakes, it is, however, possible within the "rules of the game," even if not necessarily the spirit of the game. So anyone who **** about CCs, but has ever relied on Winfinite... please take your hypocrisy elsewhere. At least the bakers were helping the whole player base out. Winfinite helps no one but yourself.

I dunno, Winfinite helps me plenty. That team is pure trash on defense and I have a Jean Grey.

More to the point though, I do agree CCs are far from cheating. They're not even a "misuse of mechanics", they're in the game solely because the engine and mechanics permit it.

Thats what makes me think perhaps the change wasn't meant for cupcakes. Perhaps it was simply a way for them to allow players to use teams they wanted without risking getting ****. Say I was fighting a Winfinite, I could use Jean Grey but if mine isn't fully leveled then it would be trouble for me later. Rather instead, my other stronger characters are put out there. Lets me play PvP with a bit more focus on countering my opponents.

Could also be wishful thinking.

Don't think winfinite will save you completely. We are seeing that you can be seen with a championed 5, loaner and champed 3 or championed 5, 1 star, 3star base. Therefore, if you mmr is low enough, winfinite may be able to be seen. Also, if your mmr is high enough, winfinite doesn't do you much good, because the match damage alone will make you have to use 3 health packs each match. Winfinite still good for pve though.